Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Okanicon
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:10, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Okanicon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
He's not important enough to be in the article on the Lenape, so he's definitely not important enough to have his own article. Not to mention I have no idea what he did as chief. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 14:01, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:43, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- What event would that be? Phil Bridger (talk) 11:57, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- This: "chief of the Lenape tribe in New Jersey". Armbrust Talk Contribs 15:23, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- That's a position, not an event. Phil Bridger (talk) 15:35, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- DELETE not notable, only one small source provided, and very unlikely to ever be any others to find, as he supposedly lived almost 400yrs ago. Heiro 03:38, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I'm not sure why the nominator thinks that the subject is "not important enough to be in the article on the Lenape". His lack of a mention in that article simply means that it is one of our >3 million imperfect articles. The Google Books search linked at the top of this discussion shows that several authors have reported Okanicon's views on alcohol,[1][2][3][4] and that he was the English Quaker settlers' favourite chief.[5] Phil Bridger (talk) 12:30, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- What I meant is that the Lenape page is a well-developed and rather complete article. If Okanicon had an important role in the history of this tribe, I would expect that one of the contributers would have at least mentioned him. But his name doesn't even appear anywhere on the page. This suggests (but doesn't state with certainty) that his role in the tribe wasn't all that significant. However, the sources you have presented certainly suggest otherwise, and it sounds like this article has potential. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 17:10, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd hardly call that article "rather complete", as it doesn't mention even one pre-1700 Lenape by name, so by your logic nobody before Teedyuscung played any significant role in the tribe. We shouldn't let any shortcomings of other Wikipedia articles cloud our judgement about the notability or otherwise of this article subject. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:36, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- What I meant is that the Lenape page is a well-developed and rather complete article. If Okanicon had an important role in the history of this tribe, I would expect that one of the contributers would have at least mentioned him. But his name doesn't even appear anywhere on the page. This suggests (but doesn't state with certainty) that his role in the tribe wasn't all that significant. However, the sources you have presented certainly suggest otherwise, and it sounds like this article has potential. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 17:10, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.